MangoKorat

Just to add to that, I know you mention a Vigo - a newer model of Hilux but in your price range its doubtful that you'll find anything other than a worn out old knocker. A Tiger/Sport Cruiser is an older model but many are treated as collector's pieces and very well looked after. If you go buy condition rather than age, you are much more likely to tick all your boxes with a Sport Crusier - especially with a 4x4.

I did not miss that point at all. I will repeat: When he enters, I am almost certain that his visa will show on the system. I don't agree with you that Immigration don't have access to that system. They may well be separate systems but it would seem incredible that immigration does not have access to both. How would they verify a visa's authenticity for example? A few years ago I entered with a physical Non O in my passport that I didn't want to trigger but the I.O. insisted. If I am correct and his visa does show on the system (clearly it not in his passport), he runs the risk of the same thing happening.

Hilux Tiger Sport Cruiser ticks most of your boxes but as you note, they can be expensive. They have a bit of a 'cult' following these days. Really nice 2.5 D4D Sport Cruisers are advertised at up to 300,000 for a 20 year old truck! I had an old Mitsubishi Grandis - it absolutely loved diesel. Some older Navara's have serious known engine issues. Never was a fan of the older Fords. In my book that leaves you with either an Isuzu or a Chevrolet. Given that they were both almost identical and shared many of the same parts - why would you object to a Chevy. There are no parts issues with Chevrolets yet, I own one (a car) and have had no problems. If you can find a Hilux at a reasonable price, that would be your best bet, next would either be an Isuzu or a Chevy. I saw a 4x4 Sport Cruiser for sale in Bangkok recently for 79,000 but is was a 3.0L. They are quite thirsty but if you are not doing big mileages, you should be OK. The 'go to' model is the 2.5 D4D. I will be looking for a 4x4 Sport Cruiser in a few months but if I can't find one, I won't have a problem with a Z71 Chevy.

I am aware of that, I am simply saying that the fact he has a visa may well show up on the system when he enters. In that case, if the I.O. on entry, behaves the same as they did with me, they will insist of triggering the visa. If they don't - great for the OP but there is no guarantee. You are claiming that Immigration have no access to the visa system and therefore won't be aware of his visa - I find that incredible as they would have no way of detecting fake visas etc.

Firstly, see the edit to my last post. Secondly, I think you have misunderstood my entire meaning. Another poster stated that Israel cannot fly over Saudi or Iraq to reach Iran. I am questioning why they would have any reason to fly over Saudi. They wouldn't care about flying over Iraq - Iraq no longer has the capability of doing anything about that. Looking at a map of the region, Jordan would be the obvious route, not Saudi. As you say, Jordan helped Israel out last night so it seems doubtful they would object to Israeli aircaft flying over their territory and even if they did, I doubt Israel would care. I don't see your point - unless you have misunderstood Ground Control.

I didn't say that, I said Jordan is a gnat to Israel. Meaning that Isael is far more powerful and would probably not be worried about crossing Jordanian airspace. They are not going to publish their flight plans but it seems highly unlikely that they flew any other route in their recent attacks in both Iraq and Syria.

Pretty sure he's aware of that, but then, re-entry permit of not, the 90 day clock is ticking and his stay may expire before he planned it to.

Are you suggesting the immigration can't check the validity of an e-visa? I very much doubt that you are correct.

As I said in a previous post. A number of years ago I entered with a physical Non O in my passport. I was staying for a few days then leaving and returning a few weeks later. The I.O. insisted on triggering my visa.

No idea on that one but I doubt Israel would care whether Jordan gave permission or not. In military terms, Jordan is a gnat to Israel.

Altthough Sunak has been weak in his 'crticism' of Israel's recent actions, he's way out of touch with the opinions of the British people. However, although I have no love of the current UK government, I doubt any of them think war is admirable as you suggest. British forces have only been involved in defensive matters in the current conflict.

I'm not playing hypothetical games. Another poster seemed to be indicating that Israel's planes would not be allowed to fly over either Saudi or Iraq. Israeli aircraft have already carried out attacks in both Iraq and Syria countries so I doubt they have any worries about flying over them. There is no need for them to fly over Saudi to get to Iran - that's my point.

Really? Yes, a fountain of goodness that doesn't repress its people, imprison them and execute them for dissent........no, not Iran. They may not have initiated a war but they certainly supply the weapons for their proxy's to wage war across the entire Middle East. They just get others to do their dirty work for them.

Possibly but doesn't the fact that Jordan appears to have been involved in Israel's defence, indicate that they would not stop any attacks in the opposite direction? To date, AFAIK, Israel has used aircaft based missiles on its attacks in Iraq and Syria - pretty sure they will have flown over Jordan to reach both those countries.

Let's not forget - we are dealing with Thailand. How many times are you required to provide pointless information in Thailand? Why for example, are Thai citizens required to show both their ID card and their Tabien Baan as ID in various matters when one can't be obtained without the other?

Why would they need to fly over Saudi or Iraq? Over Jordan would be the direct route.

That is on the presumption that when his details are entered, his visa won't show up. I'm pretty sure it will because there must be some form of visa verification for those entering without a physical visa in their passport.

I once tried to do the same, the I.O. on entry wouldn't allow it and used my visa. Of course though, that was a physical visa in my passport. I guess it will depend on whether or not your visa shows on the screen on entry - my guess is it will. I don't see any reason why they have to start your visa but they may have their rules, I doubt you'll find out until you enter.

Really? And there's me thinking they wanted a date. You are a fountain of knowledge Mr Goat, I'd never have guessed - thank you for sharing.

Dildo's are illegal in Thailand - honestly!!! 😁

Whether or not Bob's telling yet another tall tale - let's just clear up the law on this. The Thai Labour laws are there to protect Thai jobs not to prevent foreigners from going about their normal daily lives. Household cleaning or anything else to do with your normal life is not employment - paid or otherwise. If your wife does it, is it her job? You are also, while we are on the subject, allowed to do DIY on your home. I've seen several stories about this on here and on other forums, including one where a bloke reckoned he was fined for drilling a hole in the wall in his condo. I didn't believe that for one moment but let's say it was true - I'll bet my last penny that the 'fine' was not issued by a court. I'd also bet that the 'fine' didn't end up in any official coffers or that a traceable receipt was given. When your Thai friend fixes the plumbing at his house, is he depriving a Thai plumber of a job? Of course he's not and neither would you be. To be breakling the law, what you're doing would have to be deemed as employment. It doesn't have to be paid employment but it has to be classed as an occupation. Hence the rules when translated relate to 'Reserved Occupations'. I have raised the issue of carrying out DIY on your home with my lawyer who tells me that its perfectly legal. So, anyone who is threatened with being fined for doing work on their home or car - don't pay any 'fine', simply elect to have the matter heard in a Thai court. I very much doubt you'll here any further on the matter.

So why don't we see news stories about Thai drink drivers then? Its quite clear to me that its high season for publicising wrong doings by foreigners and there's a ready audience of Thai 'netizens' waiting to spread these stories all over social media.

Really? So you think he means most of us have taken a dump on Soi 4? If that is what he means, he must live a very strange life.

Speak for yourself! Many here will have had a drink there, maybe picked up a girl but I doubt many have used the street as a toilet. Pray tell, what 'shocking behaviour' are you meaning?

My point was that autopsies often reveal that although it was not the cause of death, it was present - usually low grade. I'm aware that its the 2nd biggest killer, I thought I'd be joining that club. Its difficult to present your story without giving people either false hope or being overly morbid. I have been extremely lucky in that I responded so well to the treatment I was given. I wouldn't want anyone to think that all you need is a course of Radio Therapy and Hormone Therapy and you'll be fine - that's just not the case. The key, as with any type of cancer, is to catch it early. With Prostate Cancer, and this is from my Oncologist and not my opinion, it needs catching before it breaks through the capsule of the Prostate and spreads. Its almost impossible, if not impossible to cure once it breaks out. Although it can be slowed down. My message to all guys over 50 is to get your PSA tested regularly. That's not foolproof and there is often resistance to testing from GP's etc. but its the best we have until better detection techniques are found and screening is brought in. Some private clinics in the UK now offer PC screening and I'm sure that Thai private hospitals do the same although if my experience of private hospitals is anything to go by, you have to beware of 'upselling'. Some GP's resist testing when there are no obvious symptoms because should a high PSA be found, the next step is often a biopsy (rectal) with a high risk of infection and quite often, negative results. Besides, urologists often carry out transperineal biopsies now which I'm told are less risky and the new type MRI scans reduce the need for biopsies. Knowing what I know now, I wouldn't care how much my GP resisted, I would insist. I went to my GP on a different matter and in passing, mentioned a few symptoms like getting up for a pee 2 or 3 times per night and reduced semen production. Suspicious my GP suggested a urine sample as well as a PSA test. When my PSA came back at 189 and the urine test revealed traces of blood, I was booked in for a biopsy 2 days later. Not only should men get tested regulary, they should also talk to their GP about their health in general. I've never had a problem with that but I'm told that many guys do. I am 100% certain that if I hadn't mentioned my symptoms, whilst seeing my GP on an unrelated matter, I wouldn't be here today. I was probably within weeks/months of the cancer spreading.